User talk:Usernet44

April 2018
Hello, I'm Cahk. I noticed that you recently removed content from Free trade without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Cahk (talk) 07:36, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Immigration policies of American labor unions, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. Cahk (talk) 07:37, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Cahk (talk) 07:39, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at Free trade. ''If you have sourced to indicate otherwise, please feel free to include them in the article. You can't simply remove information because you feel certain publication is "biased"'' Cahk (talk) 07:44, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently removing sourced content on the basis of your own unsourced opinions, editing to promote a point of view, and failing to respond to messages from other editors or to attempt to engage in discussion of the issues where there is disagreement. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 09:07, 17 April 2018 (UTC)